Introduction

    Gunnison is following the rest of Colorado and vast stretches of the American West as it evolves towards a new type of economy. Once heavily focused upon direct uses of natural resources for products and sources of employment, the Gunnison region is experiencing a major revolution in the role natural resources play. Recreation and tourism depend upon the quality of natural resources just as extractive activities do, but this new "amenity" economy places resources and the environment in a new and unfamiliar role. Locals, visitors and transplants from the rest of the nation enjoy the quality of life in the area while the abundance of open space, public lands, and recreational opportunities generate new sources of "service product" and employment. And yet, agriculture, forestry and mining retain an important role that many consider vital to a balanced economy in the future. The structure and direction of the region’s economy as it continues to evolve will literally determine whether "Gunnison" continues to serve as a synonym for a rural region of open spaces, well-managed resources and superior quality of life.

    Are these changes being experienced in Gunnison and throughout the American West better, desirable, more sustainable than the "old" economy? These are fundamental questions that we all ask as our regions and their resources are caught up in major economic and demographic shifts. The first step in answering these questions is to know more about the evolving structure of the area’s economy. Over several decades major changes in the role of extractive activities, services, manufacturing and government are easy to see. The impacts these changes are having on types of employment, levels of income, property values, and government services need to be understood. A first step is to equip ourselves with information about how the Gunnison economy is evolving and how it compares with trends and magnitudes of the State of Colorado and the nation. This will help us consider whether this "new" economy is desirable, how it should be shaped, and whether it can support the quality of life and superior natural resources and environment that are hallmarks of Gunnison.

    An economic and demographic profile of Gunnison Headwaters Region (Gunnison County, Colorado) has been prepared covering the period 1969-1998. Designed to put key indicators in perspective with Colorado and the US, trends and magnitudes are briefly discussed and shown visually through selected graphs and tables. Drawing upon readily available data from the US Census, Dept. of Commerce’s Regional Economic Information System (REIS) CD-Rom a "sketch" of Gunnison follows. It is built upon county-level data and is intended to give Headwaters Conference attendees a quick overview of the region and its economy. The sketch is also intended to demonstrate the types of readily available data that could be collected and reported on a periodic basis so that trends and magnitudes of the evolving regional economy are charted and publicized.
 

1. Employment and the Amenity Economy


Similar to the rest of the American West, Gunnison County is going through a "revolution" in the structure of its regional economy. Once heavily dependent upon natural resource-based economic activity, now the role of service-based employment predominates.

In 1970 Gunnison employment in resource-based sectors (farm, ag services and mining) stood at some 24% of total employment; by 1998 it had declined to 9%. Manufacturing activity in rural areas such as Gunnison has remained minimal but steady over this 28-year period at about 2%. The steady rise in service-based employment, from 75% to 90%, is one indication of dramatic changes underway in Gunnison as well as the rest of the American West.

Graph A-1


 
 



Table A-1: Percent Employent by Sector

County/Reg/Area	gunnison	gunnison	gunnison	gunnison	gunnison	gunnison	gunnison
Year	1970	1975	1980	1985	1990	1995	1998
A. Resource-Based Employ.
Total Farm Empl	11.3%	6.7%	5.2%	5.0%	3.9%	2.8%	3.1%
Ag Serv Empl	1.0%	0.8%	0.8%	1.0%	1.3%	1.3%	1.3%
Mining Empl	11.6%	11.3%	11.4%	7.9%	3.0%	4.6%	4.5%
Total Resource-Based Employ.	23.9%	18.8%	17.4%	13.8%	8.3%	8.7%	8.9%
B. Manufacturing
Manuf Empl	1.5%	2.0%	2.8%	1.9%	2.2%	2.3%	1.8%
Total Manufacturing Employ.	1.5%	2.0%	2.8%	1.9%	2.2%	2.3%	1.8%
C. Service-Based Employ.
Construct Empl	3.4%	4.7%	7.9%	9.7%	7.0%	8.2%	9.4%
Trans/Util Empl	1.1%	1.5%	1.9%	4.5%	2.7%	2.6%	2.5%
Whlsl Trade Empl	0.5%	1.3%	1.1%	0.8%	0.9%	1.1%	0.9%
Rtl Trade Empl	19.3%	21.9%	20.9%	21.5%	25.4%	24.1%	24.7%
Fin Sector Empl	5.3%	8.7%	11.3%	9.1%	9.3%	9.5%	9.2%
Services Empl	16.9%	19.9%	21.2%	22.9%	27.8%	28.2%	27.7%
Total Gov Empl	28.1%	21.1%	15.5%	15.9%	16.5%	15.3%	14.8%
Total Service-Based Employ.	74.6%	79.2%	79.8%	84.2%	89.6%	89.0%	89.3%
D. Other Employment NES
Other Employment NES	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%
Total Other Employment NES	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%
E. Total Employment
Total Employment	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
(A + B + C D Above)

Over the past near 3 decades (from 1970 through 1998) total employment in Gunnison has grown almost five-fold, from 2,711 to 10,765. But all types of employment have not shared this growth rate. Within resource-based economic activity farm employment has remained almost steady, growing from 307 to 331, while ag services has experienced substantial growth from 26 to 137. Mining has gone through several cycles of growth and decline, starting at 315 in 1970, peaking at 724 in 1980, declining to 213 in 1990 and rising to 486 in 1998.

Manufacturing, while growing nearly 5 times, in absolute numbers rose only from 40 to 195.

Services, where most of the employment growth has occurred, has also seen dramatically different trends between types of service employment. Overall service jobs grew from 2,023 to 9,616 over these 28 years. But the fastest growing service sectors included construction (growing 9 times), transportation/utilities (growing 8 times), wholesale trade (growing 7 times), retail trade (growing 4 times), and financial sector as well as services jobs (both growing near 6 times). Contrary to "folk-wisdom," total government employment over the same 28 years only doubled from 763 to 1,594 jobs.

Table B-1: Employment Trends by Sector

County/Reg/Area	gunnison	gunnison	gunnison	gunnison	gunnison	gunnison	gunnison
Year	1970	1975	1980	1985	1990	1995	1998
A. Resource-Based Employ.
Total Farm Empl	307	273	329	317	273	269	331
Ag Serv Empl	26	34	52	62	94	126	137
Mining Empl	315	459	724	503	213	451	486
Total Resource-Based Employ.	648	766	1105	882	580	846	954
B. Manufacturing
Manuf Empl	40	81	177	122	154	222	195
Total Manufacturing Employ.	40	81	177	122	154	222	195
C. Service-Based Employ.
Construct Empl	93	193	502	619	492	797	1017
Trans/Util Empl	29	62	119	286	190	255	267
Whlsl Trade Empl	13	52	71	48	61	109	102
Rtl Trade Empl	523	893	1325	1367	1781	2343	2657
Fin Sector Empl	145	354	714	578	654	922	992
Services Empl	457	810	1340	1457	1952	2743	2987
Total Gov Empl	763	858	982	1013	1160	1490	1594
Total Service-Based Employ.	2023	3222	5053	5368	6290	8659	9616
D. Other Employment NES
Other Employment NES	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Total Other Employment NES	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
E. Total Employment
Total Employment	2711	4069	6335	6372	7024	9727	10765

In relative terms Gunnison remains "resource-dependent" both in terms of direct employment in the resource sector and where "nature" generates service sector jobs and promotes migration of people looking for natural amenities as part of their lifestyle.

While Gunnison resource-based employment has declined over the past near 3 decades, in comparison to the proportion of the same types of employment in Colorado and for the US natural resource jobs remain significant. For Colorado the share of resource-based employment has gradually declined from 7% in 1970 to 4% in 1998, while for the US the change has been from 6% in 1970 to 4% in 1998. Put another way, Gunnison resource-based employment in 1970 was 3.5 times that of Colorado and 4 times that of the US. By 1998 Gunnison’s resource jobs were 2 times those in Colorado and in the US.

Graph C-1

One critical dimension of "amenity-based" economies is the growing importance of services as sources of both jobs and products. Gunnison has joined Colorado and the rest of the nation in witnessing a growth of service-based employment. In 1970 Gunnison had 75% of its jobs in services, compared to 81.5% for Colorado and 72.7% for the US. By 1998 Gunnison’s service jobs were near 90% of all jobs, compared to 88% for Colorado and 84% for the US.

Graph D-1


But how do the various types of service-based employment in Gunnison stand relative to Colorado and the US? In 1998, the latest data used in this study, a number of service sectors in Gunnison had a larger proportion of total employment than Colorado and the US while in other sectors Gunnison lags Colorado and the nation.

Gunnison lead both Colorado and the US in service-based employment in total government employment (14.8% in Gunnison versus 13.4% for Colorado and 13.7% in the US), retail trade where the largest margin of difference exists (24.7% in Gunnison versus 17.2% in Colorado and 16.7% in the US) and finally in Construction (9.4% in Gunnison, 6.9% in Colorado, and 5.5% in the US).

In contrast, Gunnison lagged both Colorado and the US in other sectors: Gunnison lagged behind both Colorado and the US in service-based employment in services (Gunnison 27.7% versus 32.0% Colorado, 31.1% USA), Wholesale trade (.9% Gunnison, 4.2% Colorado, 4.6% USA), and Transportation/Utility employment (2.5% Gunnison, 5.3% Colorado, 4.8% USA).

One challenge of the "economic development" process is to help shape a balanced economy, where jobs and income are generated from a variety of sectors. A broader way of thinking about the role of natural resources and environment in Gunnison is to consider the ways by which open space, forests, wildlife, and water support both direct resource-based employment and indirect employment through recreation, tourism, and the stimulation of new jobs in the information, technology and service sectors. While current data make it difficult to identify such service sector jobs buoyed by natural amenities, observation and experience support the notion that natural resources and environment remain a key foundation to the Gunnison regional economy.

Graph D-2

    E.  Income Trends Reflect Amenity Changes Also

The production of goods and services, according to economists, generates both a demand for "inputs" such as labor, raw materials, energy, etc and a supply of "output" in the form of products used for consumption and as inputs to further production. Thus, production-based employment generates income payments to workers as wages or salaries and benefits. But other "non-work" sources of income exist also, providing recipients additional sources of income to be used for current consumption and savings for future needs.

Trends in "sources" of income reveal additional information about the transformation of the Gunnison regional economy underway in the past 3 decades.

Table E-1: Economic Profile Trends by Percentages

Region	Gunnison	Gunnison	Gunnison	Gunnison	Gunnison	Gunnison	Gunnison
Year	1970	1975	1980	1985	1990	1995	1998
Personal income ($000)	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
Nonfarm personal income ($000)	94.7%	94.5%	97.3%	100.1%	98.8%	100.4%	100.9%
+ Farm income ($000)	5.3%	5.5%	2.7%	-0.1%	1.2%	-0.4%	-0.9%
Derivation of personal income
Net earnings ($000)	70.4%	71.4%	73.2%	67.4%	66.0%	66.8%	65.2%
+ Transfer payments ($000)	8.3%	10.3%	7.4%	8.4%	9.5%	9.0%	8.4%
Income maintenance ($000)	0.8%	0.7%	0.4%	0.7%	0.7%	0.7%	0.6%
Unemploy ins benefit payments ($000)	0.3%	0.9%	0.3%	0.5%	0.3%	0.3%	0.2%
Retirement and other ($000)	7.2%	8.7%	6.6%	7.3%	8.6%	8.1%	7.7%
+ Dividends, interest, and rent ($000)	21.3%	18.3%	19.4%	24.2%	24.5%	24.2%	26.4%
= Total Personal Income	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
Population (# of persons)	7,705	9,213	10,713	10,126	10,310	11,788	12,425
Per capita incomes
Per capita personal income ($)	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
Per capita net earnings ($)	70.4%	71.4%	73.2%	67.4%	66.0%	66.8%	65.2%
Per capita transfer payments ($)	8.3%	10.3%	7.4%	8.4%	9.5%	9.0%	8.4%
Per capita income maintenance ($)	0.8%	0.7%	0.4%	0.7%	0.6%	0.7%	0.6%
Per capita unemploy ins benefits ($)	0.3%	0.9%	0.3%	0.5%	0.3%	0.3%	0.2%
Per capita retirement & other ($)	7.2%	8.7%	6.6%	7.3%	8.6%	8.1%	7.7%
Per capita dividends, interest, & rent ($)	21.2%	18.3%	19.4%	24.1%	24.5%	24.2%	26.4%
Place of work profile
Total earnings (place of work, $000)	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
Wage and salary disbursements ($000)	72.1%	72.6%	75.5%	76.2%	73.7%	75.1%	77.0%
+ Other labor income ($000)	6.3%	7.9%	10.0%	10.2%	10.6%	10.6%	10.6%
+ Proprietors' income ($000)	21.7%	19.5%	14.6%	13.6%	15.7%	14.2%	12.4%
Nonfarm proprietors' income ($000)	19.6%	15.9%	13.4%	14.9%	14.9%	15.5%	14.4%
Farm proprietors' income ($000	2.0%	3.5%	1.2%	-1.2%	0.8%	-1.3%	-2.0%
Total full- and part- time employment	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
Wage and salary jobs	75.9%	75.4%	76.8%	73.7%	76.1%	75.4%	76.0%
Number of proprietors	24.1%	24.6%	23.2%	26.3%	23.9%	24.6%	24.0%
Number of nonfarm proprietors	18.0%	20.7%	20.8%	23.6%	21.7%	22.6%	22.2%
Number of farm proprietors	6.1%	3.9%	2.4%	2.7%	2.3%	1.9%	1.8%
Average earnings per job ($)	$5,639	$7,766	$11,453	$14,514	$14,868	$17,617	$19,454
Average wage & salary disbursements ($)	$5,353	$7,478	$11,256	$15,000	$14,418	$17,554	$19,721
Average nonfarm proprietors' income ($)	$6,166	$5,977	$7,360	$9,140	$10,227	$12,027	$12,629

Information on trends in income buttress the evidence shown in employment data that Gunnison is fast approaching a new type of economy, one that both changes the role of natural resources and the environment as a foundation for the economy and makes predominant services as the major form of economic activity.

The role of farming as a source of income has declined over the past decades and in recent years has resulted in yearly losses (counted as negative income). In 1970 farm income was 5.3% of personal income in Gunnison, while 94.7% came from nonfarm income sources. By 1998 farm losses were nearly 1% of personal income, with nonfarm income standing at 100.9% of personal income.

Graph E-1



Total personal income for an individual, family, or region consists of:
                Net earnings (Salary and wages minus personal contributions to social security)
                + Transfer Payments
                        income maintenance (often called welfare payments)
                        unemployment benefits
                        retirement
                + Dividends, interest and rent earnings

The shares of these sources of personal income have changed substantially since 1970, with "non-work" income sources growing in importance over net earnings from work. In 1970 net earnings were 70.4% of personal income, while transfer payments were 8.3% and dividends, etc. stood at 21.3%. By 1998 net earnings had declined as a share to 65.2%, transfer payments stood at 8.4%, and dividends, etc. rose to 26.4%.

Graph E-2



A third way to look at income trends is by "total earnings by place of work"." This reflects both income paid by companies to employ workers and "proprietors" income, usually termed "self-employment." In 1970 some 72% of income was through wage and salary disbursements, 6.3% came from other labor income, and 21.7% consisted of Proprietors’ income (19.6% for nonfarm proprietors and 2% from farm proprietors). By 1998 77% of income came from wages and salaries, 10.6% from other labor income, and only 12.4% from Proprietors’ income (14.4% from for nonfarm proprietors and –2% for farm proprietors).

Graph E-3


 
 

The decline in resource-based employment and companion growth in service-based employment over 3 decades is mirrored in the income figures for these economic sectors over time. In 1970 resource-based employment stood at 23.9% while resource-based income (as a proportion of total income by place of work) was 27.6%; manufacturing based employment was 1.5% while income for these jobs was 1.1%, and service-based employment stood at 74.6% while income for service workers was 71.3%. By 1998 resource-based employment had dropped to 8.9% while income for these jobs was only 14.3%; manufacturing-based employment stood at 1.8% while income paid was 2.1%; and service-based employment had risen to 89.3% while income paid to these workers had risen to 83.6% of total income by place of work. It is clear that resource-based jobs continue, on average, to pay more than proportionate to the number of employees, while service-based wages are less than proportionate to the number of employees. This validates the intuition of many that the majority of service jobs are low paying.

Table F-1: Sector Shares of Employment

County/Reg/Area	Gunnison	Gunnison	Gunnison	Gunnison	Gunnison	Gunnison	Gunnison
Year	1970	1975	1980	1985	1990	1995	1998
Current $ % of Total Income
Total Pers Inc ($ 000)	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
Nonfarm Inc ($ 000)	94.7%	94.5%	97.3%	100.1%	98.8%	100.4%	100.6%
Farm Inc ($ 000)	5.3%	5.5%	2.7%	-0.1%	1.2%	-0.4%	-0.6%
Income by Place of Work
Total Inc/ Plc of Work ($ 000)	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
Wage/Sal Inc ($ 000)	72.1%	72.6%	75.5%	76.2%	73.7%	75.1%	76.7%
+ Other Labor Inc ($ 000)	6.3%	7.9%	10.0%	10.2%	10.6%	10.6%	10.9%
+ Total Prop Inc ($ 000)	21.7%	19.5%	14.6%	13.6%	15.7%	14.2%	12.4%
Farm Prop Inc ($ 000)	2.0%	3.5%	1.2%	-1.2%	0.8%	-1.3%	-1.6%
Nonfarm Prop Inc ($ 000)	19.6%	15.9%	13.4%	14.9%	14.9%	15.5%	14.0%
Earnings by Sector
A. Resource Based Earnings
Total Farm Earn ($ 000)	6.2%	6.2%	3.0%	-0.1%	1.7%	-0.5%	-0.8%
Ag Serv Earn ($ 000)	0.6%	0.5%	0.3%	0.5%	0.6%	0.6%	0.6%
Mining Earn ($ 000)	20.7%	23.6%	26.0%	20.2%	7.6%	14.0%	14.4%
Total Resource-Based Earnings ($ 000)	27.6%	30.4%	29.3%	20.5%	9.9%	14.1%	14.3%
B. Manufacturing	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%
Manuf Earnings	1.1%	1.4%	2.6%	1.3%	1.5%	1.8%	2.1%
Total Manufacturing Earnings	1.1%	1.4%	2.6%	1.3%	1.5%	1.8%	2.1%
C. Service Based Earnings
Construct Earn ($ 000)	5.5%	5.4%	9.5%	12.0%	8.8%	11.1%	9.4%
Trans/Util Earn ($ 000)	2.2%	2.4%	2.6%	6.1%	3.7%	3.5%	3.2%
Whlsl Trade Earn ($ 000)	0.7%	2.0%	1.7%	1.0%	1.0%	1.3%	1.0%
Rtl Trade Earn ($ 000)	15.5%	14.7%	13.4%	14.8%	15.7%	15.5%	15.2%
Fin Sector Earn ($ 000)	2.7%	4.1%	5.4%	4.1%	6.7%	6.8%	8.6%
Services Earn ($ 000)	12.6%	12.6%	14.6%	17.4%	24.7%	21.6%	22.8%
Total Gov Earnings ($ 000)	32.1%	27.0%	20.9%	22.9%	28.0%	24.1%	23.5%
Total Service Based Earnings ($ 000)	71.3%	68.2%	68.0%	78.2%	88.6%	84.0%	83.6%
Total Inc/ Plc of Work (A+B+C) ($ 000)	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
CPI 1970=100

Graph F-1


 
 

Not only have direct employment opportunities based on natural resources declined over 3 decades, but even the contribution of all "net earnings" from employment have declined. Amenity economies are known for the increasing role of "non-work" sources of income, especially among retirees and "foot-loose" workers with substantial savings assets.

For Gunnison net earnings as a proportion of total personal income has declined from 70.4% in 1970 to 65.2 % in 1998. Over the same time period the contribution of transfer payments has gone from 8.3% to 8.4%, remaining nearly stable. The significant increase in earnings from dividends, interest and rent assets are reflected in a 21.3% share of personal income in 1970 versus a 26.4% share by 1998.

Table G-1: Shares of Sector Income

Region	Gunnison	Gunnison	Gunnison	Gunnison	Gunnison	Gunnison	Gunnison
Year	1970	1975	1980	1985	1990	1995	1998
Personal income ($000)	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
Nonfarm personal income ($000)	94.7%	94.5%	97.3%	100.1%	98.8%	100.4%	100.9%
+ Farm income ($000)	5.3%	5.5%	2.7%	-0.1%	1.2%	-0.4%	-0.9%
Derivation of personal income
Net earnings ($000)	70.4%	71.4%	73.2%	67.4%	66.0%	66.8%	65.2%
+ Transfer payments ($000)	8.3%	10.3%	7.4%	8.4%	9.5%	9.0%	8.4%
Income maintenance ($000)	0.8%	0.7%	0.4%	0.7%	0.7%	0.7%	0.6%
Unemploy ins benefit payments ($000)	0.3%	0.9%	0.3%	0.5%	0.3%	0.3%	0.2%
Retirement and other ($000)	7.2%	8.7%	6.6%	7.3%	8.6%	8.1%	7.7%
+ Dividends, interest, and rent ($000)	21.3%	18.3%	19.4%	24.2%	24.5%	24.2%	26.4%
= Total Personal Income	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
Population (# of persons)	7,705	9,213	10,713	10,126	10,310	11,788	12,425
Per capita incomes
Per capita personal income ($)	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
Per capita net earnings ($)	70.4%	71.4%	73.2%	67.4%	66.0%	66.8%	65.2%
Per capita transfer payments ($)	8.3%	10.3%	7.4%	8.4%	9.5%	9.0%	8.4%
Per capita income maintenance ($)	0.8%	0.7%	0.4%	0.7%	0.6%	0.7%	0.6%
Per capita unemploy ins benefits ($)	0.3%	0.9%	0.3%	0.5%	0.3%	0.3%	0.2%
Per capita retirement & other ($)	7.2%	8.7%	6.6%	7.3%	8.6%	8.1%	7.7%
Per capita dividends, interest, & rent ($)	21.2%	18.3%	19.4%	24.1%	24.5%	24.2%	26.4%
Place of work profile
Total earnings (place of work, $000)	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
Wage and salary disbursements ($000)	72.1%	72.6%	75.5%	76.2%	73.7%	75.1%	77.0%
+ Other labor income ($000)	6.3%	7.9%	10.0%	10.2%	10.6%	10.6%	10.6%
+ Proprietors' income ($000)	21.7%	19.5%	14.6%	13.6%	15.7%	14.2%	12.4%
Nonfarm proprietors' income ($000)	19.6%	15.9%	13.4%	14.9%	14.9%	15.5%	14.4%
Farm proprietors' income ($000	2.0%	3.5%	1.2%	-1.2%	0.8%	-1.3%	-2.0%
Total full- and part- time employment	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%
Wage and salary jobs	75.9%	75.4%	76.8%	73.7%	76.1%	75.4%	76.0%
Number of proprietors	24.1%	24.6%	23.2%	26.3%	23.9%	24.6%	24.0%
Number of nonfarm proprietors	18.0%	20.7%	20.8%	23.6%	21.7%	22.6%	22.2%
Number of farm proprietors	6.1%	3.9%	2.4%	2.7%	2.3%	1.9%	1.8%
Average earnings per job ($)	$5,639	$7,766	$11,453	$14,514	$14,868	$17,617	$19,454
Average wage & salary disbursements ($)	$5,353	$7,478	$11,256	$15,000	$14,418	$17,554	$19,721
Average nonfarm proprietors' income ($)	$6,166	$5,977	$7,360	$9,140	$10,227	$12,027	$12,629


 

It is important to look more closely at the composition of the "transfer payments" segment of "non-work" income. Often it is assumed that government "welfare" programs have grown steadily and now maintain individuals and families who do not work. But buried in "transfer payments" is another type of income maintenance program: retirement. As middle-aged and older individuals migrate into "amenity" regions of the American West, their sources of income switch from "work" to "non-employment" retirement transfer payments and earnings from assets.

For Gunnison this phenomenon is underway. In 1970 .8% of total transfer payments came from income maintenance programs, but by 1998 this share had declined to .6%. Transfer payments in the form of unemployment benefits stood at .3% in 1970, evolving to .2% by 1998. Over the same 3 decades retirement payments went from 7.2% in 1970 to 7.7% by 1998.

Graph G-2







H.  The Impacts of Inflation on Income and Earnings

Graph H-1

The income components making up total personal income are 1) net earnings, 2) transfer payments, and 3) dividends, interest and rent. In 1970 total personal per capita income in current dollars of $2,339 consisted of $1,647 net earnings + $194 total transfer payments + $497 asset earnings (dividends, interest and rent). By 1998, measured in constant 1970 dollars, total personal per capita income of $5,136 consisted of $3,349 net earnings + $433 total transfer payments + $1,354 asset earnings. Clearly the role of "non-work" sources of income has risen over this period, even when adjusted to a per capita basis and for the impacts of inflation.

Graph H-2

I. Gunnison Income Contrasted with Colorado and the US

 
Rural areas usually lag behind urban areas and more developed, industrial regions in levels of income. Often while the cost of living is lower in rural areas, the levels of income are substantially below income levels reflecting these more inexpensive costs. Gunnison again is no exception. Taking 1998 as an example, per capita total personal income stood at $21,572 in Gunnison, $29,994 for Colorado and $27,203 for the US.

Graph I-2